2019 mail survey results glenview school district 34

2019 Mail Survey ResultsGlenview School District 34

November 11, 2019

Summary of Approach• Survey mailed to 14,831 registered voter households within Glenview School District 34.

• Expected 8-17% response rate.

• 1,620 replied as of November 4, 2019, representing a response rate of 11%.

• An additional 95 surveys were received after the data was analyzed. These additional surveysdid not change the percentages associated with the bond ballot question.

• 80% of respondents had at least one person in their household who was identified as a likely voter.

• Not a scientific poll.

• Not a predictor of a ballot measure’s likely success or failure.

• Provides general undertone of the electorate.

Demographics of Survey Respondents

Gender

Male24%

Female54%

More Than One Person

Completed Survey

13%

Prefer Not to Respond

6%

No Response3%

Percentages may not equal 100% due to rounding.


Age

Likely Voter Survey(March 2020) Respondents

18-44: 22% 22%45-54: 18% 22%55-64: 23% 19%65-74: 19% 17%75+ 18% 13%No Response 6%

18-4422%

45-5422%

55-6419%

65-7417%

75+14%

No Response6%



Child in District 34 School


No69%

Yes31%


District EmployeeYes2%

No 94%

No Response 4%


Level of AwarenessBefore receiving the enclosed information, how much had you read, seen or heard about the facility improvement proposal being considered by District 34?

A Lot + Some = 53%

A Lot13%

Some40%Hardly Anything

20%

Nothing At All25%

No Response, 2%


Satisfaction With Amount of Information Received?

How satisfied are you with the amount of information you have received regarding District 34’s facility needs and funding proposal?

Very + Somewhat Satisfied = 65%

Very Satisfied26%

Somewhat Satisfied

39%

Not Very Satisfied

24%

Don't Know9%

[], []No Response, 3%


Likely vs. Unlikely Voter (From File)

Likely80%

Unlikely20%


How Likely are You to Vote (Self ID)?How likely are you to vote in the upcoming March 2020 primary election?

Very Likely83%

Somewhat Likely11%

Not Very Likely2%

Not at All Likely2% [], []Don’t Know/NR, 2%


Grade the DistrictSchools often use the letter grades A, B, C, D or F to grade students. If you had the chance to grade District 34, what grade would you give the District?

A+B = 62%C+D+F = 17%

A22%

B40%

C12%

D3%

Don’t Know20%

No Response1%

F2%


Grade the District’s FacilitiesWhat letter grade would you give the District 34’s school facilities?

A+B = 41%C+D+F = 32%

A9%

B32%

C22%

D8%

Don’t Know23%

No Response4%

F2%


Confidence in Handling Taxpayers’ MoneyHow confident are you that District 34 is handling taxpayers’ money wisely?

Very Confident14%

Somewhat Confident

41%Not Very Confident

18%

Not At All Confident

14%

Don’t Know11%

No Response3%

Very + Somewhat Confident = 55%Not Very + Not At All Confident = 32%


Impact on Support Knowing Spending Publicly Disclosed & Project Updates

Would you be more likely or less likely to support a future District 34 bond measure knowing that all spending from the bond would be publicly disclosed and that project updates would be presented at community information meetings and on the District’s website?

Much More Likely53%

Somewhat More Likely13%

Somewhat Less Likely29%

No Response4%


Tax SensitivityFor homeowners in District 34, the estimated tax impact of the proposed 22-year, $139 million referendum is $57.69 per $1,000 of their annual property tax bill. For example, the tax impact for a home with an annual tax bill of $10,000 would be $576.87 per year. How concerned are you about the impact of the proposed tax on your own family’s budget?

Extremely Concerned

40%

Very Concerned21%

Somewhat Concerned

22%

Not Very Concerned

16%

Don’t Know, 2%

Extremely + Very Concerned = 61%Somewhat + Not Very Concerned = 38%


Priority of FundingParts of Proposal

LowPriority(1) (2) (3) (4)

HighPriority(5)

Repairing or replacing outdated, inefficient plumbing, electrical, mechanical and HVAC systems as well as deteriorated roofing, masonry and paving.

3% 4% 13% 25% 51%

Improving accessibility, including entryways that hinder wheelchair access, for students, staff and visitors with disabilities.

7% 11% 21% 22% 35%

Eliminating the need for hallways to be used for instruction, adaptive physical education and storage by adding/reconfiguring classrooms and common areas.

10% 11% 20% 25% 30%

Providing flexible classrooms and science labs that offer proper lighting, acoustics, flooring and furniture, and align with active, inquiry-based instruction that promotes collaboration and exploration.

11% 13% 23% 27% 22%

Adding space to provide full-day kindergarten. 23% 11% 15% 16% 30%

76%

57%

55%

46%

49%

Percentages may not equal 100% due to rounding. “No response” percentages were also not included.

(4+5)

Priority of FundingParts of Proposal (Springman Middle School)

LowPriority(1) (2) (3) (4)

HighPriority(5)

Addressing Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) code issues. 8% 10% 20% 22% 36%

Updating classrooms and science labs. 9% 11% 21% 26% 29%

Adding space for special education programming. 10% 12% 22% 25% 27%

55%

58%

52%


(4+5)

How Best to Fund Full-Day Kindergarten Programming?

If District 34 adds full-day kindergarten—similar to the other District 225 feeder districts—how should this new programming be funded?


Parents should pay tuition for full‐day kindergarten, with a lesser amount charged to lower‐income families.

37%

Tuition should not be charged for full‐day kindergarten. District 34 should cover all costs associated with this programming.

34%

All parents should pay the same tuition amount for full‐day kindergarten regardless of family income.

16%

Don’t know. 7%Other 3%No Response 3%

Arguments IN FAVOR of Bond ProposalArgument in Favor

Not At AllConvincing

(1) (2) (3) (4)

VeryConvincing

(5)

There is nothing more important than keeping students and staff safe while at school. This is a fair and reasonable proposal, especially given the focus on health, safety and security.

9% 9% 17% 21% 41%

District 34 is the only District 225 feeder district that does not offer full-day kindergarten. In fact, more than three-quarters of the elementary schools in Illinois offer full-day kindergarten. Adding instructional space to offer full-day kindergarten is the right thing to do.

19% 12% 14% 19% 33%

The proposed improvements would extend the useful life of existing facilities, reduce costly emergency repairs and improve energy efficiency, saving taxpayer dollars.

8% 10% 20% 28% 30%


Arguments IN FAVOR of Bond ProposalArgument in Favor


(1) (2) (3) (4)

VeryConvincing

(5)

It’s been almost 20 years since District 34 sought voter approval of a bond measure, which was focused solely on Attea Middle School. With many of our local schools more than 50 years old and in need of critical upgrades, it’s time.

15% 13% 18% 21% 29%

Adding more space at District 34 schools is way overdue. Hallways should not be used for instruction and storage.

12% 14% 21% 20% 28%

With interest rates near historic lows and construction costs increasing, now is the right time to address school building improvements. The longer we wait, the more it will cost.

12% 14% 23% 23% 24%


Arguments AGAINST the Bond ProposalArgument Against


(1) (2) (3) (4)

VeryConvincing

(5)

Our property taxes are already too high. This will make our tax burden even worse.

9% 10% 18% 18% 41%

District 34 should have been saving for building improvements. It’s not fair that the District is all of a sudden seeking taxpayer dollars for major repairs and upgrades.

12% 12% 18% 20% 34%

District 34 is trying to do too much at one time. The focus should simply be on repairing aging school buildings, including replacing outdated mechanical systems and similar fixes.

14% 16% 21% 22% 23%


Arguments AGAINST the Bond ProposalArgument Against


(1) (2) (3) (4)

VeryConvincing

(5)

Quality teachers drive quality schools, not instructional space. Taxpayer monies should be focused on attracting and retaining quality teachers and not on facilities.

16% 19% 28% 18% 16%

Even though it could cost as much as $91 million, SpringmanMiddle School should be replaced rather than renovated.

39% 19% 21% 7% 10%


Bond Ballot QuestionIf a local election were held today, would you vote “Yes” in favor of, or “No” to oppose, a 22-year, $139 million referendum to address district-wide improvements to Glenview School District 34 facilities, including:health, safety and security upgrades; repairing and/or replacing outdated HVAC, plumbing, electrical and mechanical systems, as well as deteriorated roofing, masonry and paving; adding and reconfiguring instructional spaces and common areas, including adding space for full-day kindergarten; updating aging classrooms and science labs; and renovating and expanding Springman Middle School?

Yes: 50% No: 40%

25% 25%

17%

23%

10%

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Definitely Yes Probably Yes Probably No Definitely No Don't Know/NA

Perc

enta

ge


Support for Bond Proposal: Gender

Definitely Yes19%

Probably Yes25%

Probably No20%

Definitely No29%

Don’t Know/NA, 8%

Definitely Yes32%

Probably Yes30%Probably No

14%

Definitely No15%

Don’t Know/NA

10%

Male Female

Yes: 44% No: 49%n: 391

Yes: 62% No: 29%n: 869


Support for Bond Proposal: Gender

Definitely Yes25%

Probably Yes17%

Probably No24%

Definitely No28%

Don’t Know/NA, 5%

More Than One Person Completed Survey

Yes: 42% No: 52%n: 208


Support for Bond Proposal: Age

Age of Respondent


Perc

enta

ge

0102030405060708090

100

18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+

51 50

2613 20 19

28

27

2128 29

7

16

25

20 18

1024

3123 21

4 7 10 9 12

Def Yes Prob Yes Prob No Def No Don't Know NA

34

466

Support for Bond Proposal: Child in District 34 School

Definitely Yes39%

Probably Yes28%

Probably No12%

Definitely No15%

Don’t Know/NA, 6%

Definitely Yes19%

Probably Yes24%

Probably No19%

Definitely No27%

Don’t Know/NA10%

Child in DistrictNo Child in District

Yes: 67% No: 27%n: 508

Yes: 43% No: 46%n: 1,112


Support for Bond Proposal: District Employee

18%

17%8%

Yes: 58% No: 33%n: 40

Definitely Yes35%


5%

Definitely No28%


Don’t Know/NA10%

Support for Bond Proposal: Grade District

Grade District


Perc

enta

ge

0102030405060708090

100

A B C D/F DK

3927

1322

27

28

21

5

28

18

23

10

19

15 2034

75

20

9 8 10 4 12

Def Yes Prob Yes Prob No Def No Don't Know/NA

5

11

Support for Bond Proposal: Grade the District’s Facilities

Grade District


Perc

enta

ge

0102030405060708090

100

A B C D/F DK

11 1736

2321

23

32

20

29

22

128

1842

3012 12

20

9 9 7 6 12

Def Yes Prob Yes Prob No Def No Don't Know/NA

55

17

Support for Bond Proposal: Likely Vs. Unlikely Voter (From File)

Definitely Yes25%

Probably Yes24%

Probably No18%

Definitely No23%

Don’t Know/NA, 10%

Definitely Yes27%

Probably Yes30%

Probably No13%

Definitely No22%

Don’t Know/NA9%

Likely VoterUnlikely Voter

Yes: 49% No: 41%n: 1,300

Yes: 57% No: 35%n: 320


Support for Bond Proposal: Likely Vs. Unlikely Voter (Self Reported)

Definitely Yes11%

Probably Yes22%

Probably No20%

Definitely No32%

Don’t Know/NA, 16%

Definitely Yes27%


16%

Definitely No24%

Don’t Know/NA10%

Not Likely Very Likely

Yes: 33% No: 52%n: 65

Yes: 51% No: 40%n: 1,337


Main Concern Re: Bond Proposal (In Their Own Words)

What is your main concern, if any, regarding District 34’s facility improvement proposal?

No Answer / Left Blank (35%)

Tax Impact (18%) • “It comes right after a reassessment that went up over 30%.”• “My taxes go up much faster than my fixed income.”

Total Cost / Scope to Large (13%) • “It’s loaded with everything you can think of.”• “Too many projects at once!”

Lack of Planning / Should Have Been Funded Along the Way (3%) • “Appears 30 year lack of foresight and detailed strategic planning leading up

to this referendum.”• “Why wasn’t money set aside over the last 20-25 years?”

Main Concern Re: Bond Proposal, Cont. (In Their Own Words)

In Support of Full-Day Kindergarten (3%)• “We are in favor of full day kindergarten.”• “How soon will all day kindergarten start?”

Oversight / Transparency Needed (3%)• “Managing spending and delivery of a very complex project.”• “Want transparency in bidding and decision making.”

Statement in Support / Positive Statement (2%)• “I think people who are concerned should move back downtown, then they might

realize how wonderful are schools are.”• “Just do it and get it over.”

Safety & Security is a Priority (2%)• “Focus needs to be on safe buildings.”

Main Concern Re: Bond Proposal, Cont. (In Their Own Words)

Replace Springman Middle School vs. Renovation (1%)“Springman should be torn down.”

Against Full-Day Kindergarten (1%)“Full day kindergarten is unnecessary and costly.”

Cost Overruns (1%)“I’m afraid the projects will go over budget. What then?”

Concerned it Will Not Pass (1%)“That it won’t pass and the schools need the full $139 million.”

Question Need for Improvements at Attea Middle School (1%)“Why does a school built in 2003 need these upgrades. Ridiculous.”

Additional Information Needs• Oversight that will be in place• Ongoing disclosure• More details

• 10-year budget• Cost estimates (including breakdown by each school)• Detail explanation of how budgets were determined

• Plans to address ongoing maintenance• Other lower-cost options, including any that do not require new taxes• Construction/implementation timeline for each school• Need for ongoing communications• Details regarding bid process• Timing and impact of TIF expiring• Full disclosure of staff salaries and benefits• Outstanding debt• Amount of savings/reserves• Amount of monies that would go to administration, board, teachers

Additional Information Needs, Cont.• Current budget• Schools prioritized by need• More details on space and safety• More accessible information on District website• More information on energy efficiency• More publicity and public discussion• Focus on needs versus wants• Plans if cost overruns• Why Attea Middle School needs improvements• Enrollment forecast• Exemptions for seniors on fixed income• Consequences if measure does not pass• Budget cuts that can be made to reduce size of request• Steps to save money• Available funding from State of Illinois• Opportunities for private funding• Images of the inadequate conditions

Summary of Results• Respondents ages 45 to 54 are slightly overrepresented compared to projected turnout

for the March 2020 election. On the other hand, respondents ages 55+ are underrepresented.

• There were significantly more females responding to the mail survey than males.

• 69% of the mail survey respondents do not have a child attending a District 34 school.

• 80% of the respondents have at least one person in their household who is likely to vote in the March 2020 primary.

• There is modest awareness of the funding proposal.

• 62% of respondents gave the District an A or B grade versus 17% who gave the District a grade of C, D or F.

• Respondents who gave the District an A or B grade are more supportive of the bond proposal compared to respondents who gave the District a C, D or F grade. For example, respondents who gave the District an A grade are at 66% support. On the other hand, respondents who gave the District a D or F grade are at 10% support.

• Respondents’ level of confidence that the District is handling taxpayer monies wisely is moderately strong, with 55% who are very or somewhat confident and 32% who are not very or not at all confident.

• 66% of respondents are more likely to support the bond knowing that all spending from the voter-approved referendum would be publicly disclosed.

• There is strong tax sensitivity, with 61% of respondents indicating they are extremely or very concerned about the estimated tax impact on their own family’s budget compared to 38% who are somewhat or not very concerned.

Summary of Results, Cont.

• Arguments in favor of the bond proposal tested slightly stronger than arguments against the proposal.

• The strongest arguments in favor of the bond proposal are tied to improved safety and security, District 34 being the only District 225 feeder school not providing full-day kindergarten and extending the useful life of the District’s existing facilities.

• The strongest argument against the bond proposal is that taxes are already too high. This is followed by the idea that the District should have been saving for the proposed improvements and that the District is trying to do too much.

• Survey respondents place the highest priority on repairing or replacing outdated, inefficient plumbing, electrical, mechanical and HVAC systems as well as deteriorated roofing, masonry and paving. Adding space to provide full-day kindergarten received the lowest priority.


• There is moderate support for the bond proposal in its current form, with 50% of respondents indicating they would definitely or probably support the proposal versus 40% who would definitely or probably not support the measure.

• Support intensity is almost identical to opposition intensity:25% Definitely Yes versus 23% Definitely No

• Support is strongest from female voters, voters who have a child in a District 34 school, voters 18 to 44 years old, district employees, those who give the District high marks, and voters who give the District’s facilities low marks.

• Survey respondents are split on whether parents should pay tuition for full-day kindergarten, if implemented.


• While there is stronger support for the bond proposal from the District’s base—parents and district employees—the support level is lower than what has been seen by Beyond Your Base with tax-related referenda that were successful—this is especially true with regard to district employees. For example, voter-approved funding proposals typically have a support level at or above 70% from parents with a child in the district and district employees. The support level from parents and district employees participating in this survey is 67% and 58%, respectively.

• It will be important for the District to address voters’ concerns raised in the mail survey, including:

• the scope, total cost and tax impact of the funding proposal• steps that will be taken to provide oversight and transparency• efforts made to properly maintain the District’s facilities• the benefits of renovating versus replacing Springman Middle School• why Attea Middle School already requires upgrades• benefits of full-day kindergarten (if pursued)


Paul A. HanleyManaging DirectorBeyond Your [email protected] Blake Street, Suite 100Denver, CO 80205

2019 mail survey results glenview school district 34

Documents